Legal Opinion
United States v. Holland
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided August 19, 1958No. 3842, 3851, 3915, 3916PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMSEN, Chief Judge.
This court has heretofore ruled in these suits that all three vessels — The E. Kirby Smith, The Nyland, and The Tug Holland — were at fault and should contribute equally to the damages resulting from the collision between The Smith and The Nyland on March 17, 1956. United States v. The Tug Holland, D.C., 151 F. Supp. 772. The case is now before the court to determine damages.
A. The Government’s Damages.
Certain items of expense to the government for watchmen, drydocking, wages of master and night mate, additional discharging expense, etc., totaling $26,910.-54, are not…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- The ConquerorSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Standard Oil Co. of NJ v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Illinois Central Railroad v. CrailSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Williamson v. BarrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- Caten v. Salt City Movers & Storage Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Santiago v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1973
- Latham B. Hewlett v. Barge Bertie, in Rem, Tug Evelyn, Her Engines, Etc., in Rem, and C. G. Willis Co., Inc., in PersonamCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1969
- Amstar Corp. v. M/V ALEXANDROS T.District Court, D. Maryland · 1979
- Taylor v. KingCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- Atkins v. Alabama Drydock & Shipbuilding CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. Alabama · 1960
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.